Question regarding udev games contest rule 8

Glad to see you are hosting this contest again! I enjoyed playing the game entries in previous years, but have never entered myself. I was sad not to see the contest hosted for the past few years.

I just started working on a game that I was considering entering but I'm not sure it qualifies due to a technicality.
I am authoring in Director MX 2004 which I've learned to use at work. It publishes stand alone application files, but although they run great on my intel imac under Rosetta, they are not universal binaries.
In your rule 8, you specifically mention Rosetta as an example of a translation software that would disqualify the game, even though it is built so seamlessly into OSX. Am I disqualified from entering?

Yyyyyup. You'll have to upgrade to a later version which builds universal binaries, or choose a different tool.

A reason, you ask? Here's one: Rosetta is there now, but it won't be forever. Snow Leopard is rumored to possibly be entirely Intel-only, and it's also rumored that Rosetta is already not installed by default. A goal of this contest is to have games that will be as forward-compatible as possible in the condition in which they're entered into the contest.

Hrrmmm.... Director 11, the latest version does build universal binaries, but I can't afford it at the moment... I suppose I could try working in MX 2004, then download Adobe's 30 day trial of new version for my final contest builds, but that feels dicey, and I'm not sure if that puts watermarks on the builds or some such nonsense like that.... I don't think I have the time to learn a different tool at the moment and still make the deadline.

Well I just registered. I like the way my game is shaping up, and I'd like to enter. I figure I'll figure out a way to make it universal binary by the submission deadline, either by downloading a trial of D11, or convincing my boss to upgrade. Any pre submission prototypes I release will probably not be universal though.

If nothing else this contest has inspired me to get me off my lazy butt, and start coding the game that has been kicking around in the back of my brain for a few years. I'm close to being able to release a playable prototype for y'all to peruse.

Well the whole download the trial version of D11 to publish my final build won't work. I just installed it this weekend and unfortunately the trial doesnâ€™t let me publish. I have a workaround that involves using a generic D11 stub projector to display it. Unfortunately, the workaround is less than elegant as I canâ€™t have everything wrapped up in one application, but instead have to have an application that links to a bunch of external files in the same directory. Worse, it canâ€™t seem to find the appropriate files automatically if the application path is very long. (So if you try it, place it in your applications folder or somewhere else low down) You can download an example of this workaround here:

Alternatively, I could try to talk someone on the Director mailing list into publishing a final build for me.

If neither of those pan out, will my workaround version keep me from being disqualified? Will I have to use my inelegant workaround for my contest download? ...or can I just keep it in reserve in case it needs to be installed on a Snow Leopard machine without Rosetta?

Thanks for the support guys. I'm not sure who is in charge of the rules here. When I first joined I emailed Carlos to ask if I could submit a PowerPc build. He said he thought it was ok, but I should ask on this forum so that "veteran members will be able to dissect the ruling". FreakSoftware was the only one who replied.

I've done my best to comply with the Rosetta restriction. I'd really rather not have to upgrade with a new version of Director supposedly on the way. I'd also rather not have to depend on someone else to make a final build at the last minute. It would save me a lot of headache if I could just submit a power pc build like I've been doing for my preview releases. I've demonstrated that the program will work as a Universal binary.

I can't see any reason for this rule other than to keep entrants from getting angry if they release a game that won't work on the judges computers, and therefore have biased voting.
But in that case, the same could be said for games that are larger than others, or have greater graphics requirements.

The rules are what they are because that's simply what was discussed and vetted when they were hashed out and written. It wasn't some arbitrary "jerk" rule to piss people off.

A goal of the contest is of course to get nice useable code, but another is to have working binaries that can be played now or year from now. A year from now Snow Leopard and non-Rosetta will be a reality, and having a built game from the contest that no longer runs in that situation sucks.

Intel Macs have been around for quite a while, PowerPCs are increasingly less common, and non-Rosetta environments is an imminent reality. The rule is there so no one makes PowerPC builds that will cease to run on environments introduced just a few months from now - and forever into the future â€“ and then never get updated.

Does it suck if you're using something like Directory and just happen to have an old enough version that doesn't do Intel builds? Of course! But one of the intents of the rule was to require reasonable future-proofing of games entered.

The rules specifically state they can be changed at any time. If you want it changed, email Carlos. He's the one with control now.